Posted on 08/06/2010 8:27:25 AM PDT by NetRight Nation
A common argument made by some Republicans and conservatives is that labor unions were necessary in society a hundred years ago, but they are no longer needed in today’s workplace. This argument, however, has many flaws. When looking deep into the history of the labor movement, unless you support a society modeled closely around that of the U.S.S.R., labor unions were not just unnecessary a hundred years ago, but have created lasting damage and are still continuing to wreak havoc across the nation.
Many fail to see the downside of the American labor movement at the time of its inception. Few remember that it was a product of the progressive movement, which created many of the problems in society that we deal with today.
Just take a look at the progress that the labor unions have made in their short history. From just 90 years ago, labor unions have gone from trying to “protect” the workers that they represented to taking complete control of the companies that they were “protecting” them from. In essence, they have a track record of completely dismantling the companies that they have set up shop in.
If you need an example of this, just look to Detroit. Of the Big 3 automakers, two have ceased to exist in the form that they did for most of the 20th century. One of them, Chrysler, has been completely taken over by the United Auto Workers, a union that sought to protect the employees of the car manufacturers from the supposed “greedy” leadership that was going to sell the workers short.
The UAW can even claim General Motors as a victim of their ruthlessness. GM has completely disappeared from being a publicly traded, privately owned mega company into a publicly owned, taxpayer funded zombie corporation all due to labor union malfeasance.
The goal of the unions has not been to protect the workers, but to stop private companies from turning profits that they claim do not enrich the employees that made them possible. Instead, the unions have taken far greater roles in dismantling the companies that pay the workers handsomely and in turn, destroy the companies while enriching only the union leadership.
In short, labor unions have turned into a total scam. They hustle money from the paychecks of those they represent and pad the pockets of those in leadership — selling short the employees that could live better lives without the so-called protection offered by Big Labor.
While the auto unions provide a good look at what Big Labor has done to private industry, the same type of damage has been done in the public sector.
Teachers unions have made it nearly impossible for poorly performing teachers to be removed from the classroom. The harm done hurts the students and the taxpayers that pay for these services. Teachers unions care nothing about the level of education offered, but look more to what they will earn on the taxpayer dole.
Just look at what is happening in New Jersey. When Governor Chris Christie attempted to clean up the New Jersey education system, he was met with stiff resistance from the teachers unions, even though the taxpayers wanted a change. The unions are not in the business of providing better services; they are simply in it for the interests of the union leadership.
The federal government should not go without blame either. It is the fault of Congress that has led to such powerful labor unions across the country. With legislation such as the Wagner Act, which created the National Labor Relations Board, unions have become institutionalized in America.
There is much more wrong with Big Labor in America and this is simply the tip of the iceberg. But at no point in American history has there evern been a need for such organizations such as the SEIU, AFL, NEA, UAW, and so on to “protect” workers in the workplace.
Americans have always had the ability to vote with their feet. If a job is bad, they can move on. But at no point has a hustler of one’s paychecks been necessary for the greater good. And to believe so is to lose trust in the free market system that made America great.
Adam Bitely is the Editor-in-Chief of NetRightDaily.com for Americans for Limited Government.
Read more at NetRightDaily.com: http://netrightdaily.com/2010/08/were-labor-unions-ever-necessary/#ixzz0vq7RAoDM
Unions were not necessary to the development of child labor laws. Cultural evolution was. That is all.
Moreover, this is another example of the true purpose of unions -- to exclude competition from other segments of the workforce. It went without saying that children labored hard on family farms, and when more families lived in urban settings, children, like their parents, transitioned to laboring in urban "fields."
Not at all to say that this did not become an abusive situation. However, there was nothing noble about the union involvement in this issue. The unions were initiating limits on child labor purely to eliminate the competition of the child laborforce.
In fact, the whole idea behind COMPULSORY public education was actually to eliminate the child laborforce as a competing segment for jobs.
Again, this is not to suggest that child labor was not problematic in its particulars -- although, again, remember that it was completely normal for children, like everyone else, to work, especially before the behemoth of government schools emerged. Ben Franklin, I believe, went off at age 12 to become a blacksmith's apprentice (IIRC).
It was the unions that pushed children out of the workplace, regardless of work conditions, and pushed compulsory government education -- all in the name of eliminating laborforce competition and, yes, securing free babysitting for the young ones during the day. The Progressives then, as now, were happy to use the labor movement to advance their agenda, especially by combining the goals of the unions with the compulsory government education bureaucracy, which provided, then and now, the perfect environment for indoctrination of the next generation.
Child labor history in the U.S. Especially look at the legislative timeline.
How are you equating freedom of association with the right to unionize in the workplace and secure time and funding from the employer to do so?
“...Capitalism works great when there is fairness in the marketplace. A level playing field where the law is impartial and everybody has the opportunity to succeed or fail....”
You have it backwards: freedom and rule of law allow capitalism to grow and succeed.
In sum, what you are saying that UNIONS brought equality, freedom, and rule of Law to the United States, and prior to that, these did not exist? Or, did pre-industrial people live in some kind of happy agrarian paradise, until those nasty industrialists came along?
“What we need is a national “right to work” law that outlaws closed-shop union contracts”
.
Amen! (A la Goldwater, and Reagan)
Reading through this thread, I’m beginning to wonder what the point is.
Whether or not unions were necessary or beneficial at one point, the fact is that now they are a cancer on our society and our economy.
Not true that another farmer would offer more. Please read (or see the movie) THe Grapes of Wrath. POor people from the dustbowl, who had lost their farms and livelihoods because of natural catastrophe were indigent and desperate.
Their need was exploited by farm owners. You can vote with your feet when you don’t have hungry children and a dying mother.
Same for the Civil Rights movement, it started out as a noble clause, about equality for all, and then it turned into being all about “getting even.”
Really? Seriously? Do you understand the brutality of what was happening? It was slavery of workers in many places, all perfectly legal because the business owners had politicians and judges in their pockets.
The union movement brought about laws preventing predatory work laws that allowed a company to own an employee. It brought about anti-monopoly laws so that competition and freedom to start a business was allowed.
So yes, without unions, and the union movement of the early 20th century, there would not be the level playing field we have today.
That doesn’t excuse what unions have become, but the fact they are detrimental to economic freedom today doesn’t excuse the horrible political situations that forced them to evolve in the first place.
Yes. There was always going to be an OSHA, etc. in our history. Laws on the conditions of workplaces could have and likely would have been passed at some point without unions.
You don't let your government "unionize" against you, I wouldn't want the Army to choose when it wants to go on strike against the people and call a work stoppage, and I sure don't want them joining some "international" labor movement against us.
Don’y you know anything about history? Little children, five and six years olds, were doing dangerous jobs in facotires and on the streets — full time.
The United States went from having a world-class auto industry -- indeed, the consumer automobile and the technology to mass produce it was essentially invented here -- to having practically no auto industry. And the UAW played a very, very large role in the demise of the U.S. auto industry.
Amen.
The Grapes of Wrath was one of my favorite books growing up. However, the story is highly exaggerated. Not that those types of things never happened, but keep in mind, this was during the progressive era, where communist inklings were taking root throughout government causing the very problems that were at the root of the story. However, that point seems to be lost on its readers who yearn for the command and control state.
AS the adult child of a teacher, I will tell you what is about their jobs, their workplaces, their work environments that require them to COLLECTIVELY bargain with management —
One is hat a LOT more goes into teaching than just the hours in the classrooom. My mother worked at home for hours every day after school all day long on wither Saturday or Sunday — greading papers, creating exams and esson plans. There is a huge ugly bureacracy in the schools that invnets a lot of extra work for teachers and it really sucks up time
THen there is the horrific VIOLENCE in the schools. Ever see the movie The Blackboard Jungle? Well, it’s like that, only much worse. Teachers are attacked by hoodlum kids at school all the time. THe school system doesn’t control or punish them.
THat’s what they need a union for. However, the union doesn’t help the teachers with any of this, and my mother hated them. But please don’t imagine that being a teacher in a city is a day at the beach.
I agree with you, but if they hadn’t been needed at an earlier point, they wouldn’t have come into being.
Perhaps it is the union that keeps the school system from being able to retaliate, or it could even be stupid government laws and politically correct policies that prevent teachers from taking matters into their own hands.
Most of your examples of such treachery, I have observed, seem to be based on fiction stories/movies.
Precisely. The UAW, and laws that favor them, are the primary cause for the failure of GM and Chrysler, and for the near-demise of the auto industry in the US.
The same thing happened to a good part of the steel industry. It's a fraction of the size it once was, with many non-union operations now dominating the industry.
And, if not for the government monopoly on education, we'd see the same thing with our school system. If education were truly a competitive marketpace with many players, and with parents being the sole provider of funds, we would see the teachers unions become extinct and we would see the level of education in this country rise drastically as a result.
Okay, my real preference would be to take away all legislation that gives unions special rights at all. Let workers band together if they want, but don’t have government give them one (or two) legs up on the hiring entities.
Race To The Top--Obama's program to improve primary education--is about the only Obama program I like.
Teachers unions are opposed to it because it raises accountability standards and includes support for charter schools. They see it as "union busting." Sheesh
BTW, I'd like RTTT better if it promoted vouchers, but it's one the better things Obama is doing...in theory anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.